Logical Reasoning

PT155 · S2 · Q22 Merle: Usually when I insert

A free, expert breakdown of this official LSAT Logical Reasoning question.

  • Save & drill this skill — build targeted practice sets from questions like this one

  • Video walkthroughs — watch every question solved step by step

  • 81 official LSATs — as questions, timed sections & full-length tests

Start practicing free

Merle: Usually when I insert a dollar bill into the change machine at the office it makes a squeaking sound before it produces change.

Evidence

The machine can make sound S → OTO only when (right side) outlet is turned on.

Usually when I use the machine, Usually, it makes the sound. for me, S.

Conclusion

The electric outlet is Usually, OTO. usually turned on.

Evaluate

Because this has a conditional (only when) and repeating ideas (makes sound / outlet turned on), it's a good contender for looking at the structure.

The flaw seems to be a Sampling one. The conditional logic isn't going backwards. It's just that the author is thinking

Goal

Look for an argument with a conditional X → Y Then a premise that's saying, "in my experience, usually X." Then a conclusion that's saying, "thus, usually Y."

22.

Which one of the following arguments exhibits flawed reasoning most similar to the flawed reasoning exhibited by Merle's argument?

  1. Everyone who has read the

    Bad Premise / Conclusion Match

    This has a conditional premise: vivid imagination → disturbing The premise should be saying "in my experience, usually vivid imagination. Thus, usually disturbing." Instead the premise is about "everyone", when we were looking for a premise that dealt with the author's experience. And the conclusion should be the outcome of the conditional (disturbing), not vivid imagination. This argument had a different flaw of making a backwards (Necessary vs. Sufficient) move.

    11% picked this

  2. Some people who have read

    Bad Conclusion Match

    This has a conditional premise: ~vivid imagination → ~disturbing disturbing → vivid imagination We then have a premise saying, some people found it disturbing. The conclusion would now need to extrapolate for a broader group that there is vivid imagination. Instead, the conclusion is safely worded, pertaining only to the "some people" in this evidence. This isn't a Sampling flaw; in fact it's valid logic.

    7% picked this

  3. Many people who have read

    Bad Premise / Conclusion Match

    This has a conditional premise: found disturbing → vivid imagination We have premise saying "many people = disturbing". The conclusion would now need to extrapolate for a broader group that there is vivid imagination. Instead, the conclusion is safely worded, pertaining only to the "many people" in this evidence. This isn't a Sampling flaw; in fact it's valid logic, just like (B).

    21% picked this

  4. Correct

    Most people who have read

    Why this is right

    We have a conditional: disturbing → vivid imagination We have a premise where the trigger is true for some Sample: most [people who have read the novel] found the plot disturbing. Then we have a conclusion that extrapolates the outcome for a broader group: most [people] have vivid imagination This ended up straying a bit from our prediction, since it didn't use the first person, but it still went from "trigger is true for a smaller group" to a conclusion that "outcome is true for a larger group".

    Skill tested: Parallel Flaw · how this choice captures the argument's function is the move to repeat next time.

    51% picked this

  5. Most people who have read

    Bad Conclusion Match

    This has a conditional premise: found disturbing → vivid imagination We have premise saying "most who read novel = disturbing" The conclusion would now need to extrapolate for a broader group that there is vivid imagination. Instead, the conclusion talks about "most people with vivid imaginations" and says they found the plot disturbing. In the original argument, it said "the outcome is true for a broader group". In this answer, it says "for most people that match the outcome, the trigger is true".

    11% picked this

Continue the review in LSAT Lab

Save this question, watch the video walkthrough, and drill similar questions in your LSAT Lab account.

Save and practice this skill
LSAT Lab

Turn this review into a targeted study plan.

Save this question, drill more like it, watch the video walkthrough, and track your progress in your LSAT Lab account.

Start practicing free